you tomorrow. >> i'll see you later today at 3:00 p.m. eastern and 8:00 p.m. eastern. right now we'll send you to andrea mitchell and "andrea mitchell reports." coming up on "andrea mitchell reports," omarosa wages psychological war on team trump, with aides inside the west wing fearing who else might be caught on tape. >> can you stand at the podium and guarantee the american people they'll never hear donald trump utter the "n" word on a recording in any context? >> uh, i can't guarantee anything. sins of the fathers. a shocking grand jury report revealing a pattern of predator priests who abused thousands of children for decades. and a series of church leaders who systematically concealed the truth. >> we should emphasize that while the list of priests is long, we don't think we got them all. it was child sexual abuse,

including rape, committed by grown men, priests, against children. and closing arguments. the jury will soon begin deliberating the fate of paul manafort. the prosecution has just finished its case. can manafort's lawyers sway the jury with their final defense without having called a single witness? >> mr. manafort just rested his case. and he did so because he and his legal team believe that the government has not met its burden of proof. thanks, everyone. and we have breaking news. good day, i'm andrea mitchell in washington. we start with breaking news from alexandria, virginia, across the river, where the prosecution has finished its closing arguments in the trial of president trump's former campaign manager, paul manafort, who is charged with 18 counts of bank fraud and tax evasion. joining me is julia ainsley,

national security and justice report for nbc news, and daniel goldman, former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york, now an msnbc legal analyst, both outside the courthouse. first to you, dan goldman, let's talk about the argument from the prosecution. how did they do, what was the jury's response? how would you size it all especially? >> absolutely, andrea. in about an hour and 45 minutes, prosecutor greg andres very meticulously and persuasively led the jury through the boatload of documentary evidence. interestingly, given all the fireworks around rick gates' testimony, greg andres did not mention rick gates until almost an hour into his closing argument. really what he said was the star witness was not rick gates but he actually said, the star witness is the documents. and he only spoke for about five minutes on rick gates, and really just focused on the

documents. we did not see any of the photos of the extravagant wealth. in fact andres at one point said that manafort is not himself on trial here because of his wealth. he's on trial because he committed all of these crimes. and it was a very sort of methodical, i think that's the right word, it was a calm and measured approach to the evidence in this case. the jury did seem quite attentive, nodding at times with andres, very focused on the screens where he was laying out really what is devastating documentary proof showing that paul manafort himself, and not rick gates, was intertwined with all of the criminal activity that was charged in this case, andrea. >> and that of course is perhaps to try to take the sting out of those comments from the judge that the prosecutors objected to when they were arguing yesterday about how the jury should be charged. we all know the controversy

about the judge having interspersed comments about rick gates, undercutting the key prosecution witness. julia, in this way that dan goldman has just described, and you were in the courtroom, is it likely to try to take away the key defense argument? they didn't put on any character witnesses, they didn't obviously put on paul manafort, so their only closing argument is going to be that rick gates did it, he was the bad guy, not paul manafort. >> that's right. i think every piece of the argument that we just heard the prosecution lay out was preemptive of what they expect the defense to do when we come back from lunch. they went after rick gates, saying, look, we're not asking you to trust every word he says, we're not asking you to like him, we're asking you to look at the documents and the other witnesses and see if what he said was consistent. they also said, look, paul manafort didn't hire a boy scout, he hired someone who would commit these criminal acts with him. so they're going ahead and giving a rebuttal to what the defense will say when the

defense will arguably try to make the point that the prosecution is putting everything on rick gates and he's not a reliable witness. they also went through, as dan pointed out, lots of different documents. one thing that they pointed out we think the defense might do is say it wasn't actually paul manafort who was signing some of these documents with the bank fraud and with the tax evasion, that perhaps it was someone else, perhaps he was actually directing rick gates to do this. but then of course the prosecution says, gosh, could it really be, does it make sense that rick gates would have been the one moving all this money around and it just so happens that paul manafort benefitted by millions from these millions put into foreign bank accounts? and he says, if we could only be so lucky, which got a little chuckle from the jury. the defense isn't going to call any witnesses, they expect an attack on each piece of evidence, particularly the testimony of rick gates. and andrea, i'll point out, it's the fullest we've seen it today.

above the the overflow room and the courtroom are full. i spoke to someone who drove up from atlanta just for this today. there's a lot of interest in these closing arguments. >> indeed. and some really top notch lawyers in the courtroom trying this guys. danny cevallos, msnbc legal analyst joining us from new york, danny, how much is it a problem, a burden for the prosecution, that the judge along the way would not let the jurors look at these exhibits, these complex documents. they're now, once they get the case, go into that jury room, they have to organize, choose a foreman or forewoman, and then they have a ton of documents to go through. the burden is on, eventually, these 12 men and women. >> it could be an appealable issue. considerable discretion is given to a district court judge in deciding what the jury sees and doesn't see. it absolutely could be an appealable issue if the defense wants to make it, if there is a

conviction. but in a case like this, there is also a balancing test. if you give the jury too many documents to pore over, many they lose the forreest for the trees. if you're the defense, you're watching closely to see if the judge possibly creates issues that you can take up on appeal in the case of conviction. but in a case like this, the government has to focus on the documents and not rick gates. rick gates in the government's mind is no longer their star witness and we don't want him to be, because rick gates has the same problem all cooperating witnesses usually have, which is he is an admitted liar, a criminal, a criminal testifying not out of the goodwill of his heart but because he has a deal with the government. and to deliver on his deal, he's got to tell a story the government likes. that is what you're going to hear the defense argue in their closing. then the government gets another turn, and it's going to be a lot

different from this pragmatic closing that we first heard. this last opportunity to speak is where the government can bring their fire and brimstone, because the defense has no comeback to it. >> and dan goldman, you've been in the courthouse for a couple of days now. do we know anything more about the juror issue? some issue with one or another of the jurors that had the judge going back and forth, that had both sides going back and forth, sidebar conferences, sealed conferences. do we know anything more about that other than that they of course had four alternates who can be substituted at the last moment? >> andrea, we don't know anything more right now. and business is proceeding as usual. the parties don't seem to be pha fazed by it. it looks as if whatever that issue was, it's resolved. i would note one interesting tidbit that came out in the closing arguments that isn't as important for the case but has a greater interest to us in the media here, is that the

prosecution showed an e-mail from paul manafort on august 4th, 2016, while he was still the chairman of the campaign, where he was talking to stephen calk, the head of this federal savings bank in chicago, babout getting him a position on the advisory committee of the campaign. so this was while he was the chairman and applying for $16 million worth of loans from calk's bank. so i don't think it's going to have a huge impact on this case, but it's of interest to us. it's one of many e-mails that the jury had not seen and many documents that the jury had not yet seen before the closing argument. and the prosecution really weaved through the case quite nicely, really, as danny said, focusing on these documents, and using rick gates as the corroboration to the documents, which is the exact opposite story that we're going to hear from the defense coming up after lunch. >> fascinating.

we're all going to be staying tuned of course for the defense closing arguments. thank you so much, dan goldman, danny cevallos, and of course julia ainsley as well from alexandria. there's more ahead. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? we can'twhy?y here! flat toilet paper! i'll never get clean! way ahead of you. charmin ultra strong. it cleans better. it's four times stronger and you can use less. enjoy the go with charmin.

it was always our singular focus, a distinct determination. to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're fighting for. our cancer treatment specialists share the same vision. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. specialists focused on treating cancer. using advanced technologies. and more precise treatments than before. working as hard as we can- doing all that we can- for everyone who walks through our doors. this is cancer treatment centers of america. and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. treating cancer isn't one thing we do. it's the only thing we do.

expert medicine works here. learn more at cancercenter.com cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. this wi-fi is fast. i know! i know! i know! i know! when did brian move back in? brian's back? he doesn't get my room. he's only going to be here for like a week. like a month, tops.

oh boy. wi-fi fast enough for the whole family is simple, easy, awesome. in many cultures, young men would stay with their families until their 40's. and welcome back. president trump's white house team is terrified, according to multiple reports, that omarosa manigault newman's claim of a

recording with the president using racially reprehensible language, the "n" word, is more than just a scare tactic. the possibility of the president saying that is so toxic, even white house press secretary sarah huckabee sanders, cannot say with certainty that her boss never used the slur. >> did you ask the president whether he used the "n" word? >> the president addressed that directly. i can certainly say i never heard him say that certainly or anything similar. he addressed it to the american people. >> why didn't you ask him directly? >> again, the president answered the question directly on twitter earlier today. >> can you stand at the podium and guarantee the american people will never hear donald trump utter the "n" word on a recording in any context? >> umm, i can't guarantee anything. but i can tell you the president

addressed this question directly. i can tell you that i've never heard it. >> well. do you all know how hard it is to do what kristen welker did yesterday in that white house briefing room? joining me now is nbc white house correspondent countrikris welker. first, to you, kristen. those moments are very tense. you don't often get followup questions. you and kevin corke, one of your colleagues there, giving you that deference, you took the opportunity, you put her on the spot. how surprised were you at her reaction? >> i was surprised, andrea, and thank you for your comments. i thought that she would likely try to dance around the question. i wasn't expecting her to say "i can't guarantee anything." but i do think it was a question

that was not only about whether she was aware of a potential tape but whether she could actually know for certain that one doesn't exist. and what she essentially acknowledged yesterday is that she can't know that for certain. and so there was this very strong i think reaction to her comments yesterday in the briefing room, and this continues to be a political problem for this administration that continues to grow by the day, because you have omarosa manigault newman continuing to keep the headlines going, but also, andrea, the president himself continues to tweet about this, going to twitter, attacking omarosa, calling her a dog, for example, only escalating the problem for the administration. i go back to the point you made at the very top which is there is a lot of concern with what else omarosa manigault newman knows and what evidence she will put forward including the possibility of more tapes, andrea. >> phil rucker, you and ashley

parker have one of the great metaphors to describe the sort of reality tv president against the reality tv star who was a highly paid white house chief of staff. you guys wrote in "the washington post," now like in the jurassic park film series in which the dinosaur of turn on the scientists who created them. >> omarosa manigault newman has been a protege of donald trump's dating back to "the apprentice," she was the villain on that show. she learned a lot of trump's tricks along the way. she learned how to manipulate the media, how to create drama and expenssuspense, and develop magnetic charisma that kept viewers watching that show.

it's paying off for her, she's smartly dangling out new recordings, new allegations. she has the president and the white house staff very much on the defensive, trying to respond to her and trying to game out what could come next around the corner. >> let's talk about these nondisclosure agreements which sanders is indicating are sort of standard and which the white house says where standard. all of you have been reporting this. ma matt mclarty was chief of staff. you ran the white house. can you imagine going into the situation room to fire somebody? >> i never did. i did have to terminate a number of people, tried to do it in a dignified, sensitive way, but you do have to make those decisions. our level of turnover, though,

was so much smaller than this administration. >> you most likely did it in your office. >> i did. the white house has some small offices, unlike the public perception sometimes, but the chief of staff's office is large and private. there was no need to go to the situation room except for security briefings. >> the inappropriateness of that compounded by these ndas. the only thing that one would sign is the permanent agreement for anyone who deals with classified material which everyone throughout the government signs. it's a lifetime ban. and then if you have a book, you bring that book and they clear it, the relevant agencies clear it for classified information. >> you've got the process. you're exactly right. ndas from time to time are used in personal situations and in business but not too often there, really. we certainly, to the best of my memory, and i think it's still relatively clear and intact, did

not have m dchndas, nondisclosu. that's not going to work in a government setting. >> kimberly atkins, you're a lawyer. to my recollection, going back to the clinton and reagan years, there never has been because there is a conflict with the first amendment. the only thing that would trump the first amendment for a white house staff person is classification, government secrecy. >> right. the government would have to show some sort of compelling interest why they would prevent someone from speaking, not just during their tenure in the white house but after they leave. it would be really impossible, with the exception of classified information, to see some sort of reason that they could give that that would make any of these things, any of these contracts not unconstitutional on their face. >> katy tur also was interviewing omarosa yesterday. i wanted to play part of that. >> so you were instructed according to your book to bring up the e-mails at every point you could at the end of the 2016

campaign, hillary clinton's e-mails. >> that's correct, that was our talker. >> did donald trump know about those e-mails before they came out? >> absolutely. >> he knew what was coming out before wikileaks released them? >> yes. >> you're saying donald trump had a back channel? >> i didn't say that, you did. but i will say i will expose the corruption that went on in the campaign and the white house. >> kristen welker, she presents no evidence of that. if it were true, if she had the evidence, she did acknowledge that she has talked to robert mueller already, and would be willing to talk to him again or to mueller's team. so that would be bombshell information about complicity by the president and others in the campaign, with russian hacking and russian campaign interference. >> it would be a bombshell, andrea. there's no doubt about that. you saw katy tur really press her, trying to pin her down on how she has that information,

what if any evidence she might have. and omarosa not taking the bait, and effectively just leaving it there. rudy giuliani, the president's attorney, was out overnight saying the exact opposite, not surprisingly, andrea, he was saying, look, he was with the campaign essentially, advised the campaign, and he can say for certain, this is in rudy giuliani's words, that the president didn't know about the release of the e-mails beforehand. either way, everything that omarosa manigault newman has been saying on the airwaves will undoubtedly get the attention to some degree of the special counsel. whether or not they'll take it seriously or not remains to be seen. but it was striking to hear her say she's interviewed with the special counsel and is open to meeting with him again. >> phil rucker, how concerned are people in the white house, not knowing what else is out there? >> andrea, there's concern because omarosa has said she has many, many more tapes. it's unclear what those tapes contain. it's unclear if she has any more

recordings, for example, that include president trump or that include general kelly. she was in a lot of senior staff meetings because she was a senior staffer in the white house. did she record those meetings? are there things that are going to come out that will simply embarrass some of her colleagues? the president clearly could not restrain himself, so they're fully engaged now in trying to defend the president and defend the white house from her allegations but they simply don't know what else she has or what she'll be doing in the hours and days to come. >> it's strufinstructive that t president has used the phrase "dog" against people, male and female, white and black, but kimberly, there does seem to be a preponderance of his usage of that word to describe women and

african-american women. >> he has a particular type of vitriol when he goes against people of color and women. and yes, he's used the word "dog," "like a dog" frequently, it seemed like the first time he had actually called someone a dog. >> "he choked like a dog" during the campaign. >> exactly. he's usually saved it for people like maxine waters or now omarosa. >> one of the things that struck me also, mack, in watching lawrence o'donnell and other prime time shows on msnbc, and john brennan was on msnbc. he w pretty serious, top level career man. he had been station chief in saudi arabia and other top posts in the past. he was paid the same as omarosa was paid.

she was paid the highest level of a white house staff person, more than $170,000 a year. that's a lot of money. >> salaries have gone up since we served 25 years ago. andrea, i think there are several points. first of all, this is a telenovela. it's good for the ratings. it may be good press. but it is not the right way to run the country. president trump i don't think has made the pivot from the campaign to governing. and we're really talking about, and kristen referred to it, what could really change this episode, if you want to call it that, if there's really a tie toward the mueller investigation that is serious and that will change the complexion of this entirely. but i would finally say this is clearly a distraction, not only for the president but for the entire white house and the administration of governing and dealing with very serious issues, both domestically and internationally. that's the concern i have as a former chief of staff who had the privilege to serve the

president and this country. >> mack mclarty, kimberly atkins, phil rucker, and kristen welker, thanks so much. we'll leave it there for now. coming up, pretty afdator p. the stopping report details more than a thousand children raped and molested by members of the catholic clergy. ust walk around telling people geico could help them save money on car insurance? yea,that and homeowners, renters, motorcycle and boat insurance. huh.that's nice. what happens when you catch a fish? gecko: whoa. geico. more than just car insurance. see how much you could save at geico.com. i'm ok!

take prilosec otc and take control of heartburn. so you don't have to stash antacids here... here... or, here. kick your antacid habit with prilosec otc. one pill a day, 24 hours, zero heartburn.

a shocking new report revealing seven decades of abuse in the catholic church in pennsylvania. a grand jury investigation found that at least 300 priests molested and raped more than 1,000 children since the 1950s. and church officials covered it up. >> we should emphasize that while the list of priests is long, we don't think we got them all. >> these are wolves in shepherds' clothing. these people are not protecting the most vulnerable members of their communities. >> i think all of us will have our hole in our soul for the rest of our lives. >> we are sorry. i am sorry. we all must take this report to heart. >> it's a challenge to my faith. this should never have happened. and the church has to reach out to the victims and do whatever it can to help in their healing process.

>> joining us now is nbc's anne thompson who covers the vatican and has been reporting on this story. and michael rizendi, an investigative reporter with "the boston globe." welcome, both. it's shocking on so many levels. and seeing father tom reese who we know, i met through you over the years, and how shattering this must be for the faithful. >> it is. >> throughout the church. >> i think, andrea, this report is absolutely devastating. and you could hear it in father reese's voice. it is, how can you look at these men of god who exploited and ignored the most vulnerable in the world? jesus teaches us that you have to protect the little children. well, these men of god did not. they covered up for abusive priests. they moved these priests around. and that is what the grand jury

report makes very clear. and it is just devastating. >> you know, andrea, it is devastating. >> jump in there. why did it take so long to come out, decades? >> what's extraordinary, the story is shocking. it is devastating to the faithful but it's not really much different than what we've heard time and time again. the story was the same in boston. the story was the same in tucson, arizona. the story is the same in los angeles. it's the same in ireland, australia, chile. this is a systemic problem, and the church has yet to come to grips with it. >> anne, have we heard from the council bishops and the vatican? because this puts a very popular and innovative, reform-minded pope really on the spot. >> it does. pope francis held his weekly audit presenence today at st. p square and talked about the bridge collapse in general with

an and pray-- in genoa and pray the victims but said nothing about this. we asked the validatican press office for comment and they said no comment yet. as compassionate and as charismatic as this pope has been in his five years as pontiff, andrea, when it comes to abuse, he has been flat-footed on this issue. we saw it in chile when he went down there and at first refused to believe the victims who said they had been abused by priests there, and he appointed a bishop who was part of the coverup. then he did an amazing thing, he did a 180, he did an about face and sent his best investigator down there. he came back with a report. the pope brought all those bishops over there and they resigned en masse, and he accepted five of those resignations. so there is some movement there. next week he goes to ireland, a country that has been ravaged by

abuse. the people there are anxious to hear what the pope has to say, not just about the abuse itself but about the vatican's role in covering it up. >> to that point, cardinal wuehrle in pittsburgh who is now the archbishop in washington, put out a statement saying, while this report may be critical of some of my actions, i believe the report confirms i acted with diligence and concerns for the victims and prevent further acts of abuse. mike? >> i think the american bishops have done a decent job of putting together a document called the charter for the protection of children and young people. however, i think many bishops are not adhering to the charter. i think what we're seeing is there still is a continuing coverup everywhere. we're still seeing the catholic church fighting survivors in just about every state in the union when it comes to improving laws regarding the statute of limitations. i think the bishops can do a lot

mo more. >> and anne, as a prominent catholic leader, you're active in so many places. i know notre dame and other places where you're a trustee. is there conversation about as dramatic a change as considering marriage for priests? >> well, i think, you know, allowing priests to get married doesn't solve the problem of pedophilia. they are two different things. what has to happen here, andrea, i think, is the bishops have to be more transparent. for example -- and the church needs to be more transparent. for example, theodore mccarrick who was the cardinal in washington, who they found an incredible allegation that he abused an altar boy in the '70s, he has been removed from the ministry, will go through a cannca canonical trial, a church trial.

that's the kind of thing that sows distrust in the laity. they need to be much more transparent about what's going on. >> what about the victims? is there any possibility that the statute of limitations can be revised, or does that involve legislation? >> there's a good chance of that. in fact in several states, statutes of limitations have been revised, including massachusetts. and i think the attorney general's report, the grand jury report in pennsylvania, is going to put pressure on the legislature in pennsylvania to do that. i think what survivors would like to see are more investigations like the one the attorney general and the grand jury did in pennsylvania, because it puts pressure on political leaders to make change. >> and i think that's the interesting thing, andrea. it's not so much what is the church going to do but what are the politicians going to do now. >> thank you so much for all your reporting, mike. again, thanks to you and the spotlight team for really pulling the scab off of this gaping wound.

thank you both. meanwhile, back here, the pentagon's top spokeswoman is under investigation for alleged abuse of power. the defense department's watchdog is looking into allegations that a civilian, dana white, one of james mattis' most senior advisers, forced staff members to run errands, carrying dry cleaning, driving around in bad weather. investigators are also looking into allegations that white retaliated against staffers after they filed complaints about her. joining me now is courtney kube, nbc national security reporter. courtney, hi. this is pretty shocking, i can't recall this kind of investigation against another pentagon spokesperson. >> certainly not, andrea. we've seen cases like this with military generals and admirals, leaders. and i mean, that is what really presents us a very clear path of what this is supposed to look like here, when you are a senior

civilian or officer here in the military, here in this pentagon. there are very specific rules that you cannot have members of your staff conduct personal errands. you cannot have them do things during work hours in the office place that would in any way constitute personal errands. we've seen general officers brought down over these kinds of allegations. and what's particularly striking about this case today with dana white is that secretary mattis, of course a career marine general, marine officers, he is -- these actions, these allegations run so counter to the way that he operates here in the pentagon and the way that he operated when he was a general officer in the marine corps. you frequently see him standing in line at cvs to buy his own office supplies. he will frequently walk pass the press area when he's picking up his dry cleaning. i was on the very first trip with him when he was secretary of defense and was struck by the

fact that he picked up his luggage at andrews air force base and walked up the stairs with it. it's surprising to see one of his senior civilian political appointment t appoint appointees, if these allegations should prove true. >> does she have any response yet? >> not yet. her deputies say they're aware of the allegations and she's not going to comment yet. she of course right now is traveling with secretary of defense mattis in south america. so we here at the pentagon aren't seeing her. and i don't expect we will see anything on the record or on camera from her specific to these allegations until the investigation is complete, andrea. >> courtney kube, i know you'll be staying on it. thank you so much, courtney. >> thank you. tonight on "nbc nightly news," lester holt speaks exclusively with the ceo of twitter as social media platforms come under fire for their role in election meddling and conspiracy theories. jack dorsey answers some tough

questions from lester about free speech and security. check your local listings for airtime. coming up, party down. is there still room for moderates in the republican party? you're watching "andrea mitchell reports." stay with us right here on msnbc. i'm alex trebek here to tell you

about the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85 and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three p's. what are the three p's? the three p's of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i just turned 80. what's my price?

$9.95 a month for you, too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the number one most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed, and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock, so your rate can never go up for any reason. and with this plan, you can pick your payment date, so you can time your premium due date to work with your budget. so call now for free information. and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner, and it's yours just for calling. so call now.

we really pride ourselves on making it easy for you >> tech: at safelite autoglass, to get your windshield fixed. with safelite, you can see exactly when we'll be there. saving you time for what you love most. >> kids: whoa! >> kids vo: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪

president trump's political clout looms larged in key midwt primaries last week. tim pawlenty lost in minnesota. the surprise underscored president trump's grip on the republican party and the difficulty his republican critics face with republican primary voters. and after a drama-filled week in kansas' governor race, trump-backed candidate kris kobach ousted the incumbent republican governor who conceded last night. president trump today taking another victory lap on twitter, tweeting, great republican election results last night, so far we have the team we want. eight for nine in special

elections. red wave. well, will the red wave really exist? joining me now, former democratic new york congressman steve israel in new york, former chairman of the democratic congressional campaign committee. and here in washington, linda chavez, former director of public liaison during the reagan administration, now director of the becoming america initiative. welcome, both. steve, is it a red wave? and what's your outlook for the midterms? >> i think last night was a night of pyrrhic victories for president trump. it is true that his trump-supported candidates won their gubernatorial primaries in minnesota and kansas. that's a short term victory. but here is what they face in november. as a result of the primaries last night, minnesota now becomes far less competitive for republicans and is off the battlegrounds, it's now a pretty safe democratic safe. and kansas, which shouldn't really be competitive, is now a very competitive state. laura kelly is a terrific candidate.

so the republicans may have won two last night, or the trump party may have won two last night. but i think they're going to lose two in the general election when moderate voters in minnesota and kansas select governors who will move them forward and not back to trump. >> we know how important governors are going into a period where these governors will be in office when the next legislation -- legislative action on the census and possible gerrymandering takes place. linda, what do you think about these choices and whether or not -- can you imagine kansas with a republican governor or nominee losing to a democrat? >> well, it would be very unusual. and i'm not willing to count kris kobach out. he has been one of my arch nemeses for many years because i fought him on the immigration issue. so i'm not willing to say that he's going to lose. i will tell you that if he wins and we have redistricting in

kansas under his leadership, given what he did with that phony voter commission, voter fraud commission -- >> he was the president's appointee to head what most people called a fake voter fraud commission, alleging all sort of fraud that didn't exist. they ended up not even fully meeting, and never issued a report. >> that's exactly right. in fact the other appointees criticized him because they didn't even have access to the information. but, you know, the pawlenty race in particular, whatever happened to minnesota nice? tim pawlenty was minnesota rice a -- minnesota nice and didn't survive. >> steve, it does look like a blue year for the midterms. but the question is, is it going to be a narrow victory, will

democrats take over narrowly or will they get what could be a governing majority in the house? >> look, this environment is reminding many of us, and i would assume linda as well, of the 2010 environment that republicans had, they had a strong wind at their backs. the 2006 environment that democrats had. it looks like it's going to be one of those environments, with one exception, and you alluded to it before, andrea, and that is the republicans really fortified many of their districts because they elected republican governors and republican state legislators who just built sandbags around these districts. so as a result of the fact that republicans just hijacked the redistricting process in state houses, i think the democrats will win the majority, but we're looking at a razor-thin majority, could be within single digits, maybe, you know, the low double digits. but we're looking at a hard-fought majority that will,

you know, not -- it won't be the 63 seats that republicans picked up in 2010. closer to the 33 seats that democrats picked up in 2006. but enough to win. >> enough to win, and do you think, or is it too soon to say, whether nancy pelosi, if the democrats do win, would be elected speaker by the caucus? >> well, look. if the democrats win, they won thanks to nancy pelosi, who raises more money, travels to more places, supports more candidates, works harder than so many others. that's a decision for the democratic caucus to make and a decision for nancy pelosi to make. but that victory will in large part be as a result of her efforts. >> and linda, one thing that comes to mind now, and we were talking off camera, is that one measure of how things have changed, you had the job of publicly liaison that omarosa had in the white house. elizabeth dole did as well during the reagan years. that was always the highest level job that women would hold

in any white house back in the day. >> back in the day, that's true. >> and they were experienced government players. you came from the equal opportunity -- >> i came from the civil rights commission, i had directed the commission, i had been an editor of a editor in a magazine and award winning magazine newspaper. i had a lot of background and the fact that a reality tv personality was appointed by president trump is astonishing to me and frankly i sometimes think that maybe i ought to take it off my resume, she may have ruined that position as a serious position for anyone following here. >> and elizabeth dole went on to be cabinet. >> that's right. thankfully you are still speaking out. >> thank you. >> frequent guest. linda chavez, thank you so much. >> shutting the doors why refugees nationals are taking

unprecedented steps of dispatching workers on the u.s. border. that's ahead here on "andrea mitchell reports" here on msnbc. you have to navigate a lot of moving parts, on your business we got your back with tips and getting funding. we'll focus on ideas for growing your business and bringing all the moving parts together. join me at weekend mornings at 7:30 morning on msnbc or connect with us any time with all your devices. . . and american express has your back every step of the way- whether it's the comfort of knowing help is just a call away with global assist. or getting financing to fund your business. no one has your back like american express. so where ever you go. we're right there with you. the powerful backing of american express.

don't do business without it. don't live life without it. wmust have cost a lot. a fancy hotel. actually, i got a great deal. priceline saves you up to 60% on hotels, but that's something the hotels don't really want other guests to know. i saved about 120 dollars a night! did you say you saved 120 dollars a night on a room? 120 a night on a hotel room... that's a lot of savings! i saved even more on my flight. save up to 60% on hotels with priceline. but if something happened to you... you need life insurance! and chances are selectquote can get it for you for under a dollar a day. selectquote found michael, 38, a $500,000 policy for under $23 a month. selectquote found anna, 37, a $750,000 policy for under $23 a month.

selectquote's secret? they comparison shop a select group of great companies like these... for your best rate. give your family the security they need at a price you can afford. since 1985 selectquote has saved over a million families millions of dollars on life insurance. call this number now. or go to selectquote.com. discover what over a million families know. we shop... you save.

the white house is talking about drastically reducing the number of refugees permitted into the u.s. next year. scaling back a system to protect the world's most vulnerable

people. now behind the hard line efforts led by senior white house policy adviser, steven miller, the administration on pace to admits only half of that number. a leading organization that focused on refugees crisis overseas to intervene right here in the u.s. joining me now is eric schwartz, now, president of refugees of international. the organization is deployed inside the u.s. along the southern border and unprecedented move for this organization that historically is overseas. thank you very much, you were recently traveling in arizona and new mexico and texas, is it the separation policy or the other aspect, what's happening at the border that has caused such alarm for your group? >> i think it is both. it is the family separation

policy, that policy as awful as it is and damaging as it has been is really reflective of a broader approach of this administration, the coke off political asylum for anyone who's trying to seek a protection in the united states by telling asylum seekers at our borders they can't apply for a asylum by saying to those who come to ports of entree that even if they can, they have to wait to pressing people to go through unauthorized border crossings and arresting them and treating them like criminals. it is a broad policy that's designed to walk away from a long u.s. tradition of support for asylum seekers and people in need. >> what can you do when you go down there and we know that the aclu is doing and we know what doctors and others are doing in terms of pro bono world, what

can you do with your expertise? >> what we do is we try to report and to bring truth to the policy debate, to advocate in the policy environment and as really as partners to those organizations that are litigating on behalf of individuals. when you have policy changes, you can impact by a policy decision of the lives of thousands or if not tens of thousands. as a refugee rights reporting op gas stati obligation to bear witness and report and report important groups like the aclu that are doing at the border. >> did you think you will be doing that inside the united states? we >> well, i don't know how to answer that question. our mandate is refugee protection, that means protection of refugees whether they are in mexico or texas or

arizona or whether they are in bangladesh or iraq or syria. given the gravity of the abuses against refugees and asylum seekers trying to get into the united states, we have no alternatives but to focus our attention on the southern borders of the united states. >> and the broader picture of what's happening internationally, have you noticed proportionately there are fewer muslim refugees being permitted in and even in the smarl numb smaller number. >> yes, this is separate but a related program. this is the refugee's program where we make decisions as a government of who overseas we'll bring into the united states. the program has always been small. we are not going to settle most of the world's refugees but if we are asking governments like turkey, like lebanon or jordan to provide refuge to millions

then we ought to be prepared to provide refugee settlements to tens of thousands. that's a tiny number. tragically, the percentage of the numbers have diminished dramatically in this administration, it is enforcement note that the percentage of resettle refugees from muslim majority countries have also plummeted, it is less than 10% while more than the majority of the world refugees are from muslim countries. this is an indication of america's responsibility. >> eric schwartz, thank you for your good work and thank you for being with us. >> that does it for this edition of "andrea mitchell reports." there will be a 2:00 p.m. briefing. follow our show online and on facebook and on twitter.

chris jansing is up next right here on msnbc. >> good afternoon, i am chris jansing and in for craig melvin. we start with breaking news. half an hour from now, the defense will make its closing arguments in the paul manafort's trial. the government just finished painting him as a money hungry liar. who will they believe? church cover up, huge questions of right, wrong and accountability inside an institution that's supposed to be a moral center in our society. investigators found more than 300 priests molested more than a thousand children in one state. what can be done in the courts and what should be done in church to punish those responsible. >> the white house is curious of what omarosa has on them. >>